Error in financing?

If the building savings contracts were not building savings contracts but you would pay off directly, I would be finished 6 months earlier, so overall about 10k more expensive.

I'm still a bit puzzled about that, whether there might be a calculation error.. but it should be correct.

Have you really calculated once what the building savings contract option actually costs you compared to the annuity option? I mean calculated exactly in € (interest, closing fees, etc.).

so... talked on the phone with an old acquaintance who is now a financial advisor and learned a lot again

Either way, I need the above-mentioned conditions in "black and white" - he said he doesn't believe that these building savings contract interest rates apply for 15 years - often they are only valid for 10 years. Moreover, a building savings contract often has to be paid off within 11 years after that, which would make the installment too steep.

I did the calculation above. about 35 years in total with a constant installment, then I would be done.

He is also putting together other offers for me. Taking a private loan so that the home financing runs below 100% is currently absolutely standard for financing without equity - and waiting for equity makes no sense with the current interest rate situation. The saved money then goes back to that with a slight interest increase.

Here you probably also have to be careful who has what level of knowledge. Private loans provide significantly better conditions for the actual 80% financing, for example, and I can repay this better with special repayments or... at maturity add the installment to the home loan, which runs with a 20-year fixed term, for example.

Either way, it all turns out similar, that should also be clear.

However, the last posts really shocked me.

: The components are also completely normal. Private loans to get below 100%, often it's even the same bank, as ridiculous as it sounds, but it is so, then KFW logically a component and then the remaining loan... where is this now too much for "just one thing"?

Terms for the actually 80% financing then, for example, and this

Be careful. To get to 80%, only the broker makes a killing. I assume the 20k from your prefabricated house offer were just enough so that you come under 100%.

Building savings contract interest rates apply for 15 years - often they are only valid for 10 years. Beyond that, a building savings contract often has to be repaid in 11 years, which would make the rate too harsh.

Many financial brokers can only do classic annuity loans. Your acquaintance just doesn’t make a cut with that. 15+15 is not uncommon with BS-kassen.

Just last week I held a repayment plan for a 12+15 from a savings bank in my hands.

Have you really calculated once what the building savings contract variant actually costs you compared to the annuity variant? I mean calculated exactly in € (interest, fees, etc.).

The question is what he is offered, or what is "feasible" in the pre-scoring. But now he has a specialist who has determined possible terms for him.

So the small sneaky tricks and exact checks and offers come for me in the second step. Whether there is now a 1,000 euro closing fee somewhere doesn’t interest me either, as long as I still pay the least overall for the house.

The calculation is quite simple, if you roughly estimate it for 30 years with a continuous interest rate. It is lower at the beginning, maybe more at the end, because then no KFW etc.... but that is and will remain the framework in which you roughly move.

425k calculated as an annuity loan with 2.5% and 1,500 euros monthly:
Almost 36 years

425k calculated as an annuity loan with 2.0% and 1,500 euros monthly:
Almost 32 years

The differences are not so enormously huge, earlier – just a few years ago it looked like this:

425k calculated as an annuity loan with 4.5% and 2,000 euros monthly:
Almost 35.5 years – that is simply 216,000 euros more in the total sum compared to the first example in the total sum. You have to take that in – and houses were also bought and maybe financed exactly like this.

Between the two examples above there are also 72,000 – but the second is also significantly more realistic than the first because of KFW etc.. – if you can already secure follow-up interest rates of 2.35, overall you will probably not end up at 2.5.

Therefore, I assume or simply know that with the current interest rate situation it would be absolute nonsense to first build equity or to ask the question of rent or house. If someone claims otherwise, they should provide me with good reasons.

I just find it nonsense to look for weak points or problems, because in the end you pay a few percentage points too much.

What of course is important would be the matter of the fixed interest rate term (logically that is important) and how you can pay the building savings contract afterwards. If that has to be done in 11 years it wouldn’t really be good.

yes, the remaining 140k referred to the case if there were no building savings contract but the amount went directly into repayment.

If after 15 years I still owe 222k from the two building savings contracts and I have to be finished in another 15 years, then it would be about 1,500 euros in repayment plus still the remaining 355 KFW where after another 5 years 33k are outstanding.

So the rate would actually go up to about 1,900 and you would be completely done in 30 years.

However, the lady said that after 15 years it is re-evaluated whether one wants to increase or not etc.... Of course, she might be phrasing some things nicely, I do not want to deny that

Therefore this is also great input and I have already learned a lot about what to watch out for If it were like that, then you set aside sum X directly, repay it after 15 years and then overall it would remain constant, only a bit higher...

But yes, I also agree, 1,250 is suggested, which could not be right anyway, and actually calculated consistently it is still higher.

The 20k are the equity replacement loan as the 4th component. The house overall is 425k and consist of these 20k plus 405k (100 KFW, 305 building savings contract) – this is necessary because there is no equity.

Therefore, our rate would from the beginning be 1,250 plus the 160 from the EKED (she herself noted it as an abbreviation), in other words 1,410 euros.

Then the game begins as explained above.

She confirmed twice that during the building savings contract you can additionally save, no matter how much, and pay 5% per year on the mortgage – from that I understood that you can already prepay the loan in advance...

: The components are also completely normal. Private loan in order to get below 100%, often it is even the same bank, as ridiculous as it sounds, but it is like that, plus KFW logically one component and then the remaining loan... where is that now too much for "just one thing"?

I usually like to stay out of financing questions, I gladly leave that to the bankers here!
But honestly:
These posts remind me of the compulsory trilogy of every willing builder by Dieter Wedel "Once in a Lifetime" – the satire of a homeownership. Episode 1, how Bruno Semmeling lets himself be sold several loans, which of course have to be paid off so that the actual house loan looks cheap on paper. When his wife Trudchen points out to him that these also have to be paid, he becomes stubborn and refers to the friendly gentleman from the bank who surely knows what he is doing. A tribute to the foolish homebuyer
That on the subject of learning a lot more... we have often read already in Henrik’s first thread.
Sorry, but you paint it too simply and now really want to rush so quickly with so much hustle and bustle I want a house because the interest rates are so low. I thought you were planning to have children... who will service all these loans during that time?

I don’t know why this is being blamed on me so negatively here. I’ll just claim, but probably no one wants to admit it, that all the thoughts and calculations I have made here so far, most of the clueless people about loans, interest calculations, etc., don’t even make at all. They trust the advisor, the installments, they don’t care if there’s uncertainty after 15 years and maybe pay more than they can actually afford.

Obviously, only experts are in such a forum who argue against everything for every little thing. This is not meant badly, but it’s similar in all other forums, no matter the hobby or topic.

I also think it’s good, and I’m cautious too, and I won’t sign anything tomorrow – I just don’t know what the actual problem is. The offer mentioned here is still not bad and 5 years ago no one would have believed such an offer could even exist and everyone would have accepted it.

I don’t understand, really don’t.

Regarding the question when a child comes etc. hmm I haven’t thought about that at all What a question... of course that’s taken into account. That’s why we also calculate with 1,500 plus additional costs and not with 2,500 plus [NL].

Currently we pay about 2,000 fixed costs for rent including heating and liabilities, without additional costs like electricity, insurance etc. so let’s say 2,200 in total. Additionally, we have 1,000 – 1,500 left per month.

Exactly with these costs we also got through the first child and parental leave without restrictions, we just had no extra money left over.

With the mortgage, the liabilities fall away, it’s obviously calculated so that you don’t have them at the same time, so then we have about 1,500 for the house plus additional costs, let’s say 300 for KFW-55 total, makes 1,800 fixed costs in addition to the above mentioned 2,200 currently.

That way we can also manage permanent part-time work for one person if it’s necessary.

I hope now the uncertainties are cleared. Why does everyone always think you’re overextending yourself with every calculation? But presumably there are still enough here who have something to criticize about the calculation.